June started out well and then ended with that stupid decision which renders the Constitution just a piece of paper and the American people under a stronger thumb of the US government.
Sure we got the 10th amendment back yesterday when it was determined the individual mandate was a constitutional no no under the Commerce clause, but then in the same breath the General Welfare clause picked up the reigns and said it was perfectly acceptable as a tax.
Even then it’s not love and attraction as much as its an act of control.
The conspiratorial side of my wicked little psyche plays out the entire event as a timeline of events leading up to a re-election bid.
2009 – The WH is working with it’s minions in the House, Senate, and press to put socialized healthcare through the system. You’ve got to think at one point when the premise of the individual mandate was presented to the President, he said “Ah hell to the no! That’s unconstitutional!”
His advisors then responded with the rub. “Yes, it is. We pass it now and let SCOTUS throw it out. That will then give you a platform to run on for re-election.”
So the powers that be put that plan into motion with their willing accomplices in Congress who were and are no wiser for the matter. In the meantime, the President takes opportunities to trash SCOTUS whenever he can to get them all pissed off at him.
After all, if you need the court to throw out your signature legislation, piss them off a bit.
Jump ahead a few years and a few more attacks, and you have SCOTUS ready to throw out the law not because of bad feelings toward the President, but on principle alone.
Perhaps John Roberts considers the ramifications of what they’re about to do in creating a campaign platform. What better way to take that away?
It’s very easy.
Chief Justice Roberts put down his stinging rebuke of the law as a whole, huffed some bath salts and dined on the face of Ruth Bader Ginsberg for a few minutes where he then clinsed his pallet with a dinner mint. He loves chewing on them and then picking the remains out of his molars.
Roberts then wrote a new opinion (while still under the effects of the bath salts mind you), justifying the law as a taxable offense on the American people, even though it couldn’t really be ruled upon in that manner. After all, the tax has to have been levied before it can be considered by the court.
Sounds like a buncha horse shit doesn’t it?
Gotta better idea on why the poster boy for originalism turned his back on his own side in favor of such a bogus ruling?